Fl4m3Ph03n1x
Background
I have a module that is a GenStage. I am trying to make this module dyalizer compliant but I am not sure if I am going overboard with @spec.
Code
Imagine we have the following code:
@impl GenStage
def init(args) do
{:producer_consumer, nil}
end
This code is the init callback of a GenStage (called after running start_link).
I wonder if I should let it be (because it is clear that it is already using the behaviour) or if I should add further information:
@spec init(any) :: {:producer_consumer, nil}
@impl GenStage
def init(args) do
{:producer_consumer, nil}
end
Questions
- Which of the two version is correct?
- Which version would be better for dialyzer? (does it make a difference at all?)
Trending in Questions
I’m aware of 2 such projects, are there others?
git: GitHub - team-alembic/realworld: A fullstack Phoenix LiveView application with back...
New
I having some trouble figuring out if I have set myself too strict of standards for my production server. Currently I can handle 75% of r...
New
Hi everyone.
My team and I have been working on a fairly modest app based around video streaming and chat, but we’ve landed a customer t...
New
I really like the adapter patterns that ecto, nebulex, waffle, etc. use and would love find something similar for a key management servic...
New
Hello folks!
So at work, we are seeing some situations where we have to define some “fixed” strings that are used across the codebase in...
New
How Can I Optimise Compile Time Dependencies
I have been building an elixir application for about 2 years now. Many modules and files ha...
New
Other Trending Topics
A little off-topic, but I feel like people here have a good head on their shoulders.
I used to be quite good at making software. Was luc...
New
Hey. Is there anyone here who creates agents in their apps? Not talking about using agents, but creating them. I’m finding it pretty diff...
New
I fully migrated to my own harness from Anthropic/Gemini and I think it’s time to share it. Welcome DSH, the DeepSeek Harness, fully writ...
New
Beam Bots (or just BB for short) is a framework for building fault-tolerant robotics applications in Elixir using familiar OTP patterns. ...
New
There has been a thread to discuss the Stack Overflow Developer Survey on this forum every year since 2018, so here’s yet another one for...
New
I love Elixir. It’s one of 2 programming languages I’ve ever fallen in love with.
But I don’t use it anymore.
Serverless was the promis...
New
Categories:
Sub Categories:
Forums
Popular Tags
- #ecto
- #liveview
- #troubleshooting
- #learning-elixir
- #library
- #deployment
- #erlang
- #testing
- #genserver
- #mix
- #absinthe
- #remote-other
- #otp
- #plug
- #how-to-question
- #macros
- #postgres
- #elixirconf
- #channels
- #exunit
- #discussion
- #code-sync
- #podcasts
- #javascript
- #onsite
- #dialyzer
- #docker
- #authentication
- #ai
- #umbrella
- #full-time-contract
- #podcasts-by-brainlid
- #ecto-query
- #blog-post
- #elixirconf-us
- #elixir-ls
- #phoenix_html
- #iex
- #graphql
- #genstage
- #websockets
- #supervisor
- #advent-of-code
- #distillery
- #processes
- #elixirconf-eu
- #api
- #forms
- #security
- #metaprogramming










Showing Posts 1 to 6- Show Best Posts
- Show All (oldest first)
- Show All (newest first)
NobbZ
From the documentation it seems as if that additionally to erroring when impls are missing or no callback that fits the impl, only
@doc falseis implied on@impl.Though, in general, whether you have
@implor not, dialyzer will check you function against the@callbacktype when you implement a callback.Fl4m3Ph03n1x
But which way would you recommend? Would the
@specclash?NobbZ
If the spec is a subset of what is described per the callback, then it doesn’t clash. I’m not sure though how dialyzer looks at it, also, as the interface is defined from the outside world, I’d not try to re(de)fine the spec.
Fl4m3Ph03n1x
I see. Better play it safe!
sasajuric
You can provide a typespec for behaviour callback functions. If you do so, and some arg or the return type in your spec is not a subtype of the callback spec, dialyzer will emit a corresponding warning. The same will happen if the types inferred from the callback code do not match spec types.
So e.g. the following
GenServercode:Will lead to a dialyzer warning:
which means that either the spec or the impl is wrong.
So far, I didn’t got into a habit of writing specs for callbacks, but I’ve been toying with this idea for some time. I think it would help documenting expected callback args, and might help catching some errors.
Fl4m3Ph03n1x
I’ve been toying with this idea as well, but I left it because overall in my current environment people feel it’s duplicated documentation that adds more noise and makes the code harder to maintain (that’s why I created this post).
Overall I like the idea of specifying the sub-type of the callback I am about to return for clarity’s sake, but if there is also the chance of causing dialyzer conflicts (as @NobbZ pointed out) then I am ok with leaving it be until I or someone else better understands how dialyzer works inside.